but, as bob woodward pointed out when he wrote this book about the grand bargain negotiations, it's not going to be looked at through this historical prism as the boehner era, this is the obama e.r.a. if the economists are right and things don't go well for the country, doesn't the president have to worry about that legacy of his? >> i agree with you entirely. i have argued from the beginning that republicans should hold out. that they had more strength than they thought. that obama wasn't holding all the cards. i think he has the advantage obviously because republicans in all the policy are the ones who will take the blame. but nonetheless, the larger issue, if you are obama, is not who is popular and who is not, he's won his last election. that doesn't matter anymore. what obama does care about and should care about is his legacy. if you go over the cliff he may get a bump temporarily and the republicans will take a hit but his legacy will be his second term. and if he wrecks the economy, as he would, by not being able to remedy the consequences of going over the cliff, then he's goin